Not only does [paternalism] force officers to risk potentially life-threatening physical altercations . . . , it also forces those who signed up “to serve and protect” to act in direct contradiction to that purpose.
So long as a person does not hurt anyone through the use of force, his decision to use a given substance should be respected legally, even if it may lead to his ruination.
Requiring people to attend school, over and against their (and their family’s) wishes teaches students that they should not trust their own judgment, that they should instead respect the values that government authority figures dictate to them.
We all ought to be thanking companies for providing such learning experiences to young citizens rather than forcing them to give even more.
The motive behind the [light bulb] ban exhibits the same collectivist paternalism seen in Anthem. As a consequence, the ban will curtail our freedom to decide what is best for our lives.
EPA Grading scheme for vehicles distorts our ability to act on our own judgment
The Environmental Protection Agency recently proposed a scheme by which vehicles would be "graded" based on fuel efficiency. According to a recent article in the Wall Street Journal:
"Under the system, the only
“You can’t handle the truth!”
That’s the federal government’s latest message to Americans seeking to learn the content of their own DNA.
Recent advances in biotechnology have allowed private companies to offer affordable genetic testing directly to consumers, to help them determine their risks of developing problems
A California county recently banned fast-food restaurants from including toys in their kids' meals. The goal of this new ban is to reduce rampant obesity in today's youth by breaking "the link between unhealthy food and prizes." On the face of it, the effects of
Are those who oppose health care reform simply racist? Or perhaps just trying to fill their unemployment-related free time? Two articles recently appearing in the New York Times offer just such accounts of what motivates the Tea Party protesters and other vocal opponents of the
Editorial: Up in arms, April 13, 2009
The Daily Princetonian
Within your editorial, “Up in Arms”, you rightly point out that guns, as such, do not compromise the relationship between students and Public Safety officers. Yet, given the tension that many civilians experience when faced with